National Security

Obama's Busy AfPak Week

By Scott Wilson
President Obama gave a brief nod to health care reform Monday with a Rose Garden rally for doctors. But he'll spend most of his week on the most potentially far-reaching foreign policy decision of his administration: what to do in Afghanistan.

Late Monday afternoon, Obama is scheduled to meet with Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who earlier in the day appeared to tacitly rebuke Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal when he said that military advice should remain "private."

McChrystal, the commander of the roughly 100,000 U.S. and international forces in Afghanistan, has carried out a very public campaign on behalf of his stark assessment of the war, which calls for a new military strategy and vastly more resources to carry it out.

The public advocacy, including a blunt speech in London last week during which he rejected more modest options being considered within the White House, has forced Obama and his advisers to discuss a pivotal policy review more publicly than they had wanted.

The internal review continues with meetings scheduled for Wednesday and Friday at the White House, where Obama will meet with senior national security advisers and military leaders.

During last week's three-hour review session, senior White House officials challenged a number of McChrystal's assumptions about the timing and goals of the war effort. Some within the administration are considering -- and beginning to make the case for -- a narrower anti-terrorism policy in Afghanistan rather than the expansive counter-insurgency campaign that the uniformed military favors.

The more modest plan would maintain roughly the same number of combat troops in the near term, while speeding up the training of Afghan forces, intensifying Predator drone strikes against al-Qaeda operatives, and supporting the nuclear-armed Pakistan government in its fight against he Taliban.

McChrystal has called such a strategy "sort-sighted," arguing that it would result in a weak Afghan state and the restoration of the kind of al-Qaeda sanctuary that existed before Sept. 11, 2001.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said during Monday's regular briefing for reporters that withdrawing from Afghanistan is "not an option," even though the flawed Aug. 20 presidential election there has left the administration with an uncertain political partner to help carry to its strategy.

Regarding Gates, a holdover from the Bush administration, Gibbs said Obama "relies greatly on his viewpoints." He said Gates provides "unvarnished advice that doesn't have a political agenda."

In the past, Gates has expressed skepticism that additional U.S. combat forces are the solution to the worsening -- and increasingly unpopular -- war in Afghanistan. It is unclear where he stands in the current review, although his opinion will likely carry significant weight with Obama.

Asked if McChrystal's public lobbying is complicating the review process, Gibbs said, "I don't think it detracts from it." A day earlier, Obama's National Security Adviser James L. Jones, a retired four-star general, said "military advice should come up through the chain of command."

On Tuesday, Obama is scheduled to meet at the White House with Congressional leaders from both parties. Gibbs said Obama intends to use the session to provide House and Senate leaders with an update on how the policy review process is going.

Obama's faces an awkward dynamic in Congress over his Afghanistan policy.

Republicans, so far, have been the strongest advocates for an expanded war effort. Democrats, meanwhile, appear reluctant to dispatch additional combat forces, which McChrystal is expected to request in the weeks ahead.

If Obama agrees to additional troops, he may have to rely on opposition support in Congress to secure the funding at a time when many Republicans are bitterly fighting his domestic agenda.

Since taking office, Obama has deployed an additional 21,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan. By the end of the year, 68,000 U.S. soldiers and Marines are scheduled to be on the ground there.

Comments

No, just the last 8 years... Not only did he screw up, he showed why having a dummy in the WhiteHouse, can not only screw up the U.S., but the entire world...

No, Clinton didn't do us any favors with Nafta, and Obama's latest fiasco, with allowing the Chinese Communist Flag to be flown on Government property, in full view of the WhiteHouse is a cold slap in the face to everyone who has ever worn the uniform, Not to mention those that fought at Chosin Reservoir... It's unbelievable, that he could allow this to happen...

But I seriously doubt if "George Dubya" would have had the balls to change a thing, as long as he and his cronies make money, hand-over-fist, he wouldn't care...

No, Bush is responsible for this mess, I'm no Clinton lover, but when he left office in 2000, the U.S. had a trade surplus, we were paying down the debt, and the unemployment rate was negligible...

But I don't like this talk about 2014...
WTF does that mean...? Obama's administration said they don't expect the unemployment rate to recover until 2014... WTF does that mean...?

Are we suppose to live off our savings for the next 5 years, waiting for the unemployment rate to recover...? NO, THAT'S UNACCEPTABLE!!!

He needs to take some steps to improve the jobs situation first, and if that means not giving any money away to foreign countries, just because he doesn't want to be seen as putting up protectionist style barriers, then so be it... We have the worst, one-way trade deals on the planet, and we our getting screwed left and right while countries like China and Japan, protect their markets and industries...

BTW: I am retired Military, so you Fox-News lovers, who say everyone who doesn't agree with them is unpatriotic, can kiss my xxx.

Posted by: China-Sailor | October 6, 2009 9:48 PM

Obama must decide soon whether this is about winning at politics or at war.

Until he decides, all he will do is continue to weaken the USA.

Then again, maybe that's Obama's master plan.

Our country has weakened in every respect since Obama became president.

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | October 6, 2009 8:50 PM

This is so funny. The republicans destroy the country after running the Congress for 8 years and the Bush presidency. And all they can come up with is "self adulation". Self adulation? Why? because the President has self confidence and self esteem and you have none? Why? because the President has a 150 IQ and yours is 100? As humans we hate what we fear. Hate and fear go hand in hand. Republicans fear change...so they hate it and they hate the bringer of change. They must attack...spread lies...and use other reprehensible behavior and tactics all in the name of "free speech." Well then Republicans...why is it that the vast majority disagreed with you and the way you ran the country into the ground the previous 8 years? Why do 58% still disagree with you and support Obama wholeheartedly? This is a Democracy and when We the American People voted last year...we looked at your performance or lack thereof...we looked at how you and Bush brought this country to ruin and how your policies and philosophy are characteristically wrong. We VOTED FOR CHANGE and 58% of us are more than happy with President Obama's performance. You republicans are obviously out of power now and out of fashion. This is why you poll 35% and will probably drop even further. Your republican congressmen are polling 15%. You have the arrogance to ruin this country and then tell the Majority that we somehow made a mistake with our vote? This is why your numbers will continue to drop and why the republican party is dying a slow death in this country. The vast majority saw though your lies, deception, corruption, and false ideology. The vast majority witnessed your performance over the last 8 years and found you wanting. If you don't have anything positive to contribute, don't say anything at all.

Posted by: vintel7 | October 6, 2009 11:53 AM

politimmy said -"we need to rid this country of liberals."

You have no clue what your talking about. It was Bush and the Republicans toxic narcissism that destroyed this country. You don't have a clue what narcissism is. I am a practicing psychologist and see people like you every day. If you want to know what narcissism is...look in the mirror. Narcissism is what is fueling your hate...which is really self hate. Narcissism and its insecurity is what fuels your perceived "need" to own and use guns. Narcissism and hate are why you desire to "rid the world of liberals." It's your backwards hillbilly mentality that is the problem. Yours and the 35% that agree with you. You need to stop projecting your hate and narcissism onto the president....who does not display any symptoms of narcissism. When your IQ reaches the 140's or 150's like Obamas, then you can comment and criticize. Yet..all I see in any republican posts are fear, hate, and insecurity.

Posted by: vintel7 | October 6, 2009 11:02 AM

kimkimminni1- I completely agree with you. All of these problems were created by the Republicans and the buck was passed to President Obama. It's hypocrisy and arrogance at its best with these unconscious mentally challenged people. Republicans created the problems and now want to criticize and condemn the President who is working his tail off to fix them. Republicans display their self defeating, hate filled, bigoted, Anti Americanism every day that they spread this garbage. You want to believe that you are country loving patriots yet you republicans have done nothing for this country and you continue to do nothing.

Posted by: vintel7 | October 6, 2009 10:49 AM

politimmy: You need to take your own advice.
This narcissistic egoist has taken this country from a world class country to a laughing stock in nine short months. If this is what the liberal agenda is, then we need to rid this country of liberals.

Posted by: sandynh | October 5, 2009 5:40 PM

Eight years of cowboy diplomacy, squandering our good will across the globe and the mess is all Obamas fault. What bed have you been hiding under?

Posted by: poliltimmy | October 6, 2009 9:43 AM

8 years of battle and supply,8 years of enemy organizing. Its not only a holy war its a war of occupation where even if you would win, The lose of life and cost would be astronomical. A permanent position would have to be claimed just to hold the position. a loosing combination of language and religion would constantly regroup and attack. this war was already lost when Obama took over. You surly don't believe that the republicans would hand over a winnable war to the democrats? Their looking to pass the buck like usual. They've already passed the buck for the economic collapse and Bush and Paulson stimulus plan. The republican party actually gave a completely ruined government to Obama and the democrats. And now they're running a massive propaganda campaign to reject any re-cooperation by the Obama administration and passing the buck for the total mess and cost of clean up to the democrats. They've got to be communist infiltrators. So far as commander McCrystal goes he should be demoted for attempting a military coo. What is he another Harvard delinquent?

Posted by: kimkimminni1 | October 6, 2009 9:23 AM

Oh my Good God,does this mean that Liar in
Chief Absentee President and Commander in
Chief Coward Barack Hussein Obama will be
having a 30 whole minute meeting with General Stanley McChyrstal this week too?..
Obama worse most pathetic Commander in Chief and most incompetent President ever..
Wake Up Congress Impeach Obama & Bring Our
Troops Home From Afghanistan & Iraq Now!
And Fire Idiotic Screw Up Sec of Defense
Robert Loser Gates as well..I bet Obama will not let some 15 Minute with both the
Democrat & Republican Congressional Leaders
today,as Obama cannot let that delay his next much more important date night with
Michelle and Oprah for such trivia matters.
The only way out of Afghanistan & Iraq can
only be by removal of Obama from office,
thur Impeachment of Barack Obama,or Voting
Out Every Incumbent Democrat & Republican
In Congress in 2010 and 2012. Please Support Our Troops By Contacting Congress
And Demanding Firing Of Gates & Impeachment
of Loser in Chief Absentee Barack Obama!

Posted by: sandy5274 | October 6, 2009 8:51 AM

It is hard for me to believe that the shift in Obama's position that was clear during the campaign and reiterated in March is not being slowed for political reasons - not to save lives.

As President of all Americans Obama will need to face the small liberal minority... or get nothing until replacement in 2012.

Posted by: sally62 | October 5, 2009 11:09 PM

Well then...it's a good thing that we the majority (58%) who elected Obama President of the United States are well pleased with the president's job performance and very glad and proud that we elected President Obama. To the whiny minority (40%) you should shut your pie holes with your false lies and hate filled rhetoric. You do our country a disservice to spread fear, hate, and lies about the President.

Posted by: vintel7 | October 5, 2009 10:02 PM

A FEW SIMPLE QUESTIONS:

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE STRATEGY HE ANNOUNCED AT A CALLED PRESS CONFERENCE IN MARCH 2009?? IT IS NOW OCTOBER!! THAT WAS SIX MONTHS AGO!!

DID HE NOT KNOW WHAT HE WAS DOING THEN?

DID HE NOT HAVE ALL OF THE ANSWERS TO DEVELOP A STRATEGY?

TIME IS A PRECIOUS RESOURCE WHEN YOU ARE IN COMBAT! HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE OBAMA TO MAKE A DECISION? HOW MANY APPEARANCES ON LENO, LETTERMAN (EVEN THE VIEW), BEFORE HE COMES TO GRIPS WITH THE FACT THAT HE IS NOW THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF --- NOT BUSH??

This decision will be a true test of Obama's leadership. It will be a far reaching decision, regardless of the direction.

* If he decides not to honor the troop increase, why should our troops remain and be killed slowly but surely by the Taliban? If we are not there to WIN, then the troops should be withdrawn. They should not be victims of indecision.

*If he decides to increase the troop level, he should plan for involvement for the long haul. A culture based on opium trade, warlords, and radical Islam is not changed over a decade -- but requires generations. Look how long we have been in the Balkans; Korea; for Pete’s sake – Germany and Japan!

*If he decides to pull out (as the far left would propose), he will cede Afghanistan (AND BY EXTENSION, PAKISTAN) to radical Islam. Two major problems: what will happen to the nukes in Pakistan, and what fuse will be ignited between India and Pakistan (both nuclear powers) when the US pulls out? The whole idea was to engage radical Islam on their turf -- not a repeat of the Twin Towers.

NOW, LET US SEE WHAT LEADER EMERGES!!

* An appeaser, placing the US at risk?

* A far thinking risk taker with the goal of winning?

This is going to tell us if Obama is up to the task of protecting the USA!!

If he makes the wrong decision, and this Country is attacked again, Obama will not be in a position to blame Bush using convoluted Obama Team logic!

It just seems that everything Obama attempts to do, HE FIRES FIRST: THEN HE GETS READY: AND WELL AFTER THE FACT, HE AIMS!! HE IS WAY TOO READY TO GET BEFORE HIS TELEPROMPTER BEFORE HE HAS THOUGHT THROUGH THE RAMIFICATIONS OF WHAT HIS SPEECH WRITERS HAVE WRITTEN!

THE USA PAYS THE PRICE FOR HIS SELF ADULATION!

Posted by: wheeljc | October 5, 2009 9:47 PM

Sorry Dodgers1 but you are wrong. President Obama inherited this mess from Republicans. Let's see...what was the state of the union right before Obama took office?

1.Two wars started by Bush and Republicans still raging. Bush and the Republicans didn't finish the job.
2.The country has been in recession since 2007...ah...that would be Bush.
3. Bush left a 1 Trillion budget deficit and expanded government more than any president before him.
4. The Republicans de-regulated the banking industry which collapsed before Obama took office.
5. Iran and N. Korea- Both went nuke under Bushie. Bushie's solution...throw it off on the next president.
6. Osama Bin Laden still runs free.
7. Gitmo - another wonderful Bush creation that Obama inherited.
8. Republicans and Bush ruined America's image and prestige in the world.
9. Bush and Rove outed a CIA operative.
10. Countless Republican scandals and corruption.

And the list goes on and on. You're smoking crack if you think Obama is responsible for this mess. He is responsible for fixing the Bush Republican fiasco...yet the facts are against you. You lose.

Posted by: vintel7 | October 5, 2009 8:57 PM

Here we go again. Bush is to blame for anything and everything. Who is the President? It's Obama. Who makes the decisions now? Bush or Obama? Obama is now in charge. He's been in office about 9 months. The buck stops with Obama.

While Obama decides what to do in Afghanistan, 53 American soldiers died. We are over 1.8 trillion dollars in debt. A year ago we were 600 billion in debt.
Obama flew the flag of China, a repressive regiem, in front of the White House. He goes to Copenhagen in the middle of a war and a debate over health care. We have an unemloyment rate of 9.8%. A year ago, it was 6.1% (read the Department of Labor web site to verify, if you wish).

Obama should stop hiding behind the shadows of Bush and take the criticism for his poor decisions or non-decisions, whichever applies. In the opinion of an registered independent (not a Republican or a conservative), Obama is worthless and weak.

Posted by: Dodgers1 | October 5, 2009 8:36 PM

It is truly sickening and disgusting to read the hate and fear filled republican drivel here. Yet no republicans here or in Congress have offered one solution. Republicans and Bush started 2 wars that they did not finish and wasted 1 trillion dollars of taxpayer money and are responsible for 4000 plus American deaths, countless maimed or wounded for life Americans, 600,000 plus dead Iraqis and the list goes on. The republicans and Bush failed this country by not catching Osama Bin Laden...who still runs free. President Obama inherited this mess from Bush and G-d bless him. The very same republicans that created these problems and that decimated and raped our economy and left Obama a hug deficit. To all republicans. YOU CREATED THIS MESS. So shut your pie holes and be part of the solution or at least offer solutions. No...instead all you do is whine and cry like a lot of self righteous hypocrites...unable to take responsibility for the garbage you created in this world. Sick pukes.

Posted by: vintel7 | October 5, 2009 8:28 PM

"Obama the Non-Veteran ought to salute McChrystal for not only his service, but his adherence to Duty, Honor, Country instead of polls. Obama the Coward does not rate above an E-1. Obama is an embarrassment as Commander in Chief. He gets owned by the French on military matters. He can't beat smoking. He wastes time on the Olympics, while 8 brave men died under his flag, waiting on a commitment from a coward."

Actually, these 8 brave U.S. soldiers died under the direct command of McChrystal who was off giving outside his chain of command speeches in London instead of staying in Afghanistan and working on the logistics of pulling those troops out of unpopulated area bases per his counterinsurgency strategy (a base pullback he had publicly disclosed). For want of command imperative right up to McChrystal, the heavy cargo helicopters necessary for pulling those soldiers out of those bases were not made available leaving them and the Afghan forces vulnerable to getting overrun by the local tribes.

Posted by: M__M | October 5, 2009 8:00 PM

Obama is unable to make a decision about Afghanistan. Since the disclosure of McChrystal's call for a surge, 54 American soldiers have died. Obama, instead of making a decision, goes to Copenhagen with his wife, kids and Oprah.

McChrystal should simply retire along with other generals eligible for retirement. Since the far left, like Obama, hates the military, we should eliminate the defense budget and destroy our nuclear arms. That would more than give us enough money for health care. Since our American soldiers have wives, children and family, they should drop their armament and be allowed to come home.

America, like Obama, has no spine. We will give up our freedom to live and surrender, if necessary. Let's do it now while we have a chance.

Posted by: Dodgers1 | October 5, 2009 8:00 PM

9 out of 10 Doctors agree...

Socialism is a National Cancer!

O'Bomba-Care;

the "Clunker" of them all!

Got Cash? :-(

Posted by: SAINT---The | October 5, 2009 7:48 PM

Either way it now clear Obarma is going to take the blame or success of the war himself. If refuses the military advice an do supply what they need and they fail then it his fault. If supplies them and they win he can take some of the credit. If supplies them and they still fail at least the blame will be spread around.

It seem to me following the general advice is the only way out of trouble for himself.

Posted by: davidknowles2 | October 5, 2009 7:39 PM

McChrystal is the NATO Commander. Apparently, Gibbs and Gates are not aware of that?? They should check the newspapers to see what is going on. When NATO countries demand a report on their troops, McChrystal must respond. He gave Hussein Obama the report in advance, but apparently our traveling president was so busy with the Olympics and raising campaign funds he forgot to read the report. (He can read, can't he? Apparently Gates and Gibbs cannot.)

Just because Hussein Obama wanted to pull a one upmanship on Bush's Surge, he has backed himself into a loose loose scenario: He promised to get America out of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and solve the problem, but the situation is deteriorating and if the Presidential Wimp just walks away he will give the Talliban and Al Quaeda a huge international victory if he pulls out of Afghanistan. President Dumb Bunny backed himself into a corner with his own arrogance, inexperience and ignorance. If he had not escalated the military effort in Afghanistan in March, he would not be facing this decision today, which he was warned way back in December 2008 would happen if he sent in more troops. Guy has got to starting thinking more than one campaign speech in advance. A leader needs to consider the impact of his decisions, not just charge ahead like a 16 year old with a Mustang convertible.

Posted by: Incredulous52 | October 5, 2009 7:28 PM

As an old army brat I know that there is such a thing as a chain of command. A general is not suppose to be bringing his case to the public to force the hand of his Commander in Chief....

Hence, I leave off with 2 important quotes:

"War is to serious to entrust to military men." Georges Clemenceau, French statesman, physician, and journalist, prime minister of France from 1906-1909 and 1917-1920

And more importantly,

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed." Dwight D. Eisenhower, President and WW II General

Posted by: abbydelabbey | October 5, 2009 7:25 PM

The general was absolutely correct by making it a public matter.

Only a complete moron sit still and wait for a clown like Babooma, the Organ Grinder's Monkey, to do nothing and then blame it on everybody else in classic Liberal Socialist manner.

Posted by: panielsen | October 5, 2009 7:09 PM

If the president didn't authorize these speeches than the General was wrong for giving them.

He deserved the rebuke.

I have family in Nigeria. I speak from experience. You do not want your military leaders bucking civilian rule.

Members of the military dedicate their life to protecting their country through warfare.

To them most problems can be solved through force. So civilian rulers have to take that into account when they make decisions. The general isn't thinking about the recession, Iran, North Korea, the lack of public support for this war, etc.

So is his perspective is naturally narrow. It's the president's job to see the bigger picture.

Essentially, is "winning the war" worth the outlay of resources, and loss of life the general requires?

Believe it or not, some wars aren't worth winning.

Posted by: onifadee | October 5, 2009 6:53 PM

It’s never too late to admit we’ve made a strategic blunder. Job one was to defeat al Qaeda and their leader Osama bin Ladin. Overthrowing a country didn’t defeat them. Putting up a puppet leader didn’t defeat them. Pakistan now looms eminently as the next country to face our wrath in the continuing saga of: where’s Waldo? This strategy, and whatever we hope to gain from it, by any measure of success, isn’t worth the precious lives that will be lost in the process. Bring the troops home, and figure out another way to catch terrorists, and secure our country from their wrath.

Posted by: way2ski | October 5, 2009 6:51 PM

One Mc like the other Mc not really McChrystal knows a good leader when he sees one and that is NOT now or NEVER going to be w/ an ILLEGAL ALIEN that is going above and beyond to destroy America. IMPEACH this Nit Wit obama NOW!!!!!!!!!! obama being a military leader you can't be serious the only military he's interested in is his Army. You know the one that has to be as strong and as well funded as our U.S. Military. This weasel shouldn't even mentioned in the same article w/ Great Military Leaders. IMPEACH obama NOW!!!

Posted by: WRH51 | October 5, 2009 6:30 PM

Isn't a cornerstone of this administration supposed to be more transparency in governing? Additionally, a cornerstone of our democracy is supposed to be civilian oversight of the military. Finally, did anything General McChrystal say harm our military effort or expose our men to greater risk? I say "Thank You" for military leaders who stand up for their men and say what they believe needs to be said. And I hope the civilian oversight will do its job timely and properly and not worry about what citizens may think. We need good Leaders in the Executive Branch, not great politicians.

Posted by: thinking1962 | October 5, 2009 6:29 PM

General McChrystal received so good reviews and so high publicity when he was selected as the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan that his ego shoot up to General Douglas McCarthur level. And now he acts like the issue of the Afghan war is his, and that he alone should determine
its course or solution singlehandedly.

But the deadly attack in the American outpost that killed 8 U.S. soldiers was carried "by a tribal militia, not the Taliban," proves that we are not fighting only the Pashtun (the Taliban) in Afghanistan, but other tribes as well. And that blows away the myth that most Afghans are happy with the U.S. occupation, the democracy, and the rampant corruption that followed the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. And if General McChrystal's 10-year plan to eliminate the Taliban is to be taken seriously, the Pashtun comprise 42% of the Afghan population for elimination. Add to that the other tribes -as noted above- hostile to the U.S., and it adds up to at least 50% of the Afghans as our deadly enemies who must be eliminated - in order for us to win the war! Then, the obvious question arises: How do we eliminate the Taliban, and the other hostile to us tribes, and win the war in Afghanistan? Do we kill 50% of the Afghans, or about 35 million people?

I think General McChrystal sounds more and more like General Douglas MacArthur - especially since he likes to venture outside the chain of command, and push his cause directly through the press and the media to have his way in Afghanistan. And I believe that Baraq Obama should tell him -after he finish the ongoing "Afghan Review"- exactly what president Harry Truman told General MacArthur when he insisted to nuke North Korea during the Korean War: "You are fired!" Wars and egomaniac Generals don't do well in a "war quagmire" like Afghanistan. Nikos Retsos, retired professor

Posted by: Nikos_Retsos | October 5, 2009 6:14 PM

TEAM OBAMA: REMOVE McCHRYSTAL, STOP MILITARY/SECURITY MICROWAVE 'DIRECTED ENERGY' WAR CRIMES AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

General McChrystal disrespected the office of the President and the Constitution. He violated the chain of command, and the expectation that trusted military advisers should offer their counsel to the President in private. He also appears to have played a central role in the cover-up of the circumstances surrounding the friendly-fire death in Iraq of former NFL star Pat Tillman.

President Obama should remove him from power, along with the leaders of a security/military/intel cabal which has deployed classified, silent, injury- and illness-inducing, mood-altering, "slow-kill" microwave and laser directed energy weapons systems against "targeted" American citizens -- human rights violations which constitute war crimes against the American people.

so, what the he11 has he been doing for the past nine months? playing grab a## with interns while smoking cigarettes in the non smoking zone white house?

reading articles like this worries me.

i just hope our exalted, tall, scrawny one doesn't hurt that little pinhead brain of his.

Posted by: AuthoritativeAuthoritarian | October 5, 2009 5:41 PM

politimmy: You need to take your own advice.
This narcissistic egoist has taken this country from a world class country to a laughing stock in nine short months. If this is what the liberal agenda is, then we need to rid this country of liberals.

Posted by: sandynh | October 5, 2009 5:40 PM

Boy, the nuts are out early today.

Posted by: upperdeck4 | October 5, 2009 5:17 PM

Obama the Non-Veteran ought to salute McChrystal for not only his service, but his adherence to Duty, Honor, Country instead of polls. Obama the Coward does not rate above an E-1. Obama is an embarrassment as Commander in Chief. He gets owned by the French on military matters. He can't beat smoking. He wastes time on the Olympics, while 8 brave men died under his flag, waiting on a commitment from a coward.

Obama needs to resign.

He's destroyed the economy while raising Banker Pay, neglected his duty to the Middle Class, abandoned the troops in Afghanistan to party in Copenhagen, and puts on a Dog and Pony show with White Coat Handouts for Photo Ops.

Obama should run a White Flag up the White House Pole and paint a yellow stripe down his back.

“Ideally, it’s better for military advice to come up through the chain of command.”

Heck, your Command is stuck so high up in the clouds of Whisky Baffledom that we had to shove it up your colon, Jonsie.

Posted by: HereComesTheJudge | October 5, 2009 4:45 PM

The General should STFU! It is not his job to voice his requests/concerns in public. I believe he should be removed for his blatant insubordination. He made his recommendation. It is not his decision. No wonder our military is so messed up, the commanders think they are politicians. For that General you must retire before becoming a politician. Until then, do your job and respect the chain of command. And remember the answer is "YES SIR".

P.S. And don't forget to salute.

Posted by: poliltimmy | October 5, 2009 4:28 PM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.